Cothran v. Knight
| Citation | 45 S.C. 1,22 S.E. 596 |
| Parties | COTHRAN. v. KNIGHT et al. |
| Decision Date | 09 September 1895 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
Replevin—Damages — Evidence —Appeal—Exceptions by Respondent.
1. It is proper to refuse to permit a witness to testify as to how much he considered himself damaged by the taking of certain cotton, where he is not interrogated as to the facts on which he bases his opinion.
2. In an action of claim and delivery, one who was not a subscribing witness to the return bond may testify as to its execution, for the purpose of showing an admission by defendant that he had taken the property from plaintiff, and that the property was taken from defendant under said claim and delivery proceedings.
3. Respondent's exceptions to the ruling of the court will not be considered on appeal where he failed to give notice to appellant that he desired to sustain the judgment appealed from upon other grounds than those upon which it is rested by the trial court, and failed to state the additional grounds upon which he proposed to rely.
Appeal from common pleas circuit court of Greenville county; Ernest Gary, Judge.
Action by J. R. Cothran against J. E. Knight and another for the recovery of certain personal property, and damages for the alleged unlawful detention thereof. There was order of nonsuit, from which plaintiff appeals. Reversed.
Jos. A. McCullough and Geo. W. Dillard, for appellant.
Earle & Money, for respondents.
This action was commenced on the 29th November, 1893, by service of the summons and complaint on the defendants. The action was for the recovery of personal property, and damages for the alleged unlawful detention of the same The immediate delivery of the said property was demanded. The necessary bond and affidavit were served, and possession of the property was accordingly taken by plaintiff. The defendants answered, and claimed a return of the property, and, for that purpose, executed, and filed with the sheriff, the necessary undertaking. The cause came on for trial before his honor, Ernest Gary, presiding judge, and a jury. Upon the close of plaintiff's testimony the presiding judge, on motion of defendants' attorneys, granted an order of nonsuit, from which the plaintiff has appealed to this court.
After the reading of the complaint the defendants' attorneys interposed an oral demurrer (which was afterwards reduced to writing, as required by the rule of court), upon the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, which demurrer was overruled. The defendants excepted to the ruling of the circuit judge in overruling the demurrer on several grounds, stated in the case, but did Dot give written notice to the attorney of the appellant that they desired to sustain the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
...subject-matter was not of such character as to authorize the introduction of opinion from the necessity of the case." In Cothran v. Knight, 45 S.C. 3, 22 S.E. 596, the in an opinion by the present Chief Justice said: "The witness was not interrogated as to the facts upon which he based his ......
-
Bramlett v. Young
...115 S.E. 764; Iler v. Jennings, 87 S.C. 87, 68 S.E. 1041; McKittrick v. Greenville Traction Co., 84 S.C. 275, 66 S.E. 289; Cothran v. Knight, 45 S.C. 1, 22 S.E. 596.' This Court has held that where an action is brought for the construction and reformation of a deed that such is of an equita......
-
Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co. v. South Carolina Tax Commission, 17428
...by the rule as so amended appears to have been overlooked by counsel in one case and by this court in another. In Cothran v. Knight, 1894, 45 S.C. 1, 22 S.E. 596, where plaintiff had appealed from an order of nonsuit, the 'case' showed that respondents had excepted to the trial judge's orde......
-
Green v. City of Bennettsville
...177 S.C. 70, 180 S.E. 804; Burkhalter v. Townsend, 160 S.C. 134, 158 S.E. 221; Asbill v. Martin, 84 S.C. 271, 66 S.E. 297; Cothran v. Knight, 45 S.C. 1, 22 S.E. 596. passed upon all of the issues raised by this appeal and having reached a conclusion different from that of the Circuit Judge,......